Cited by 13Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderDevelopmental and Educational NeuropsychologyNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Is There a Functional Relation Between Set Shifting and Hyperactivity in Children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)?

Open access
Irwin, Lauren N., Groves, Nicole B., Soto, Elia F., Kofler, Michael J.·2020·Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society

Abstract

Objective: Replicated evidence indicates that children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) show disproportionate increases in hyperactivity/physical movement when their underdeveloped executive functions are taxed. However, our understanding of hyperactivity’s relation with set shifting is limited, which is surprising given set shifting’s importance as the third core executive function alongside working memory and inhibition. The aim of this study was to experimentally examine the effect of imposing set shifting and inhibition demands on objectively measured activity level in children with and without ADHD. Method: The current study used a validated experimental manipulation to differentially evoke set shifting, inhibition, and general cognitive demands in a carefully phenotyped sample of children aged 8–13 years with ADHD ( n = 43) and without ADHD ( n = 34). Activity level was sampled during each task using multiple, high-precision actigraphs; total hyperactivity scores (THS) were calculated. Results: Results of the 2 × 5 Bayesian ANOVA for hyperactivity revealed strong support for a main effect of task (BF 10 = 1.79 × 10 18 , p < .001, ω 2 = .20), such that children upregulated their physical movement in response to general cognitive demands and set shifting demands specifically, but not in response to increased inhibition demands. Importantly, however, this manipulation did not disproportionally increase hyperactivity in ADHD as demonstrated by significant evidence against the task × group interaction (BF 01 = 18.21, p = .48, ω 2 = .002). Conclusions: Inhibition demands do not cause children to upregulate their physical activity. Set shifting produces reliable increases in children’s physical movement/hyperactivity over and above the effects of general cognitive demands but cannot specifically explain hyperactivity in children with ADHD.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1355617720000545

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A meta-analysis found a small-to-medium inhibitory control effect in ASD (d=0.48), with younger children showing more pronounced deficits than adolescents (preschool d=0.72; school-aged d=0.56; adolescence d=0.42).

    “A meta-analysis identified a small-to-medium effect (d=0.48), with younger children showing more pronounced deficits than adolescents (preschool d=0.72; vs. school-aged d=0.56; vs. adolescence d=0.42).81”

    From Executive function deficits in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and autism spectrum disorder (2024) · cites this paper as [81]

    The Method > Participants passage describes an ADHD study that excluded children with autism spectrum disorder. The Discussion addresses inhibitory-control demands and hyperactivity, but neither it nor the passages found by searching the reported effect sizes and ASD age groups reports an ASD meta-analysis or the claimed estimates. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Ambulatory Monitoring. (2004). The Micromini Motionlogger Actigraph and family of recorders user’s manual (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Author.
  2. Wechsler D (2014). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fourth/Fifth Edition. San Antonio: Pearson.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Irwin, L. N., Groves, N. B., Soto, E. F., & Kofler, M. J.
Affiliations
Florida State University (US)
Corresponding author
Kofler, Michael J.
Venue
Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society
Published
2020-05-27
Volume
26
Issue
10
Pages
1019-1027
ISSN
  • 1355-6177 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-7661
OpenAlex
W3029234980
Cited by
13
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1
FWCI
1.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R34MH102499, R01MH115048)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, set-shifting, hyperactivity, executive function, inhibition, physical activity, actigraphy, children, cognitive demand
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Bayes Theorem, Child, Female, Humans, Inhibition, Psychological, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Neuropsychological Tests, Executive Function

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review